[HN Gopher] Italy's Bending Spoons, owner of AOL and Vimeo, file...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Italy's Bending Spoons, owner of AOL and Vimeo, files for Nasdaq
       IPO
        
       Author : mmarian
       Score  : 117 points
       Date   : 2026-06-08 15:04 UTC (13 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.reuters.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.reuters.com)
        
       | lhoff wrote:
       | They also own Komoot and I am anxiously awaiting the
       | enshittification.
       | 
       | As of now my use cases still work and it certainly helped that I
       | bought the lifetime all-world map package.
        
         | w4der wrote:
         | It has already started, many features which you could
         | previously access without an account are now locked behind a
         | login screen.
        
       | elffjs wrote:
       | Per Wikipedia, Bending Spoons owns: AOL, Brightcove, Eventbrite,
       | Evernote, Harvest, Issuu, Komoot, Meetup, MileIQ, Remini,
       | StreamYard, Tractive, Vimeo, and WeTransfer.
       | 
       | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bending_Spoons
        
         | postalcoder wrote:
         | You missed filmic. Wow. So these people are the reason why
         | Filmic went overnight from one of my favorite iOS apps to
         | something for the trash heap.
         | 
         | my knee jerk reaction is to throw shade at the ppl operating
         | the company but, upon second thought, there's an obvious
         | pattern of them relieving the company from people who knew less
         | how to run (and sustain) it. I haven't used evernote in almost
         | a decade but it actually seems.. fine? I stopped using it when
         | the company started selling merch as a latch ditch effort to
         | make money.
        
           | fckgw wrote:
           | They're basically the retirement home for once-good apps and
           | services who still serve a dwindling core audience but are
           | not longer growing or even a real contender in their field.
        
           | BonoboIO wrote:
           | At least Evernote was saved by Bending Spoons. At one point,
           | even Evernote was getting roughly a third of its monthly
           | revenue from merchandise, which is pretty wild for a
           | paperless note-taking app and a decent sign that the core
           | business was already in bad shape. For the rest, though, they
           | seem very good at squeezing hard whatever is left.
        
             | drob518 wrote:
             | Yep, but now they're jacking the pricing to the moon and
             | everyone is starting to leave for other apps. I almost did
             | it this year and probably will do it next year.
        
               | jonfromsf wrote:
               | I left last month. $250 a year or something crazy like
               | that. Obsidian has a free web clipper, I'm planning on
               | using that since I was just bookmarking stuff.
        
       | righthand wrote:
       | Interesting, Vimeo sat under IAC for almost 20 years claiming it
       | would go public, when it finally did it was eventually sold off
       | to Bending Spoons not even 5 years in.
        
         | michelb wrote:
         | While I'm not a huge fan of the Bending Spoons model, Vimeo
         | sure got improved quickly.
        
           | muglug wrote:
           | What exactly? From what I've heard, most of what was released
           | in the months after the acquisition were features that were
           | already in development/behind feature flags.
        
       | xnx wrote:
       | But how will they make it about AI...?
        
         | raphman wrote:
         | Hmm, assuming that the AI bubble might pop a little bit after
         | the upcoming IPOs, maybe it's better not to call yourself an AI
         | company then?
        
           | joxdosba wrote:
           | That seems like a very odd assumption to make.
        
       | raphman wrote:
       | > _" Founded in 2013, Bending Spoons reported a net income of
       | $27.5 million on revenue of $601 million for the three months
       | ended March 31, compared to a net loss of $112.2 million on
       | revenue of $259 million a year earlier. A large chunk of its
       | revenue comes from recurring subscriptions, providing a more
       | predictable stream of income."_
       | 
       | Gergely Orosz did an interview with them in 2024:
       | 
       | https://newsletter.pragmaticengineer.com/p/twisting-the-rule...
        
         | stefan_ wrote:
         | Clever, shitty numbers and they decide to IPO at the peak of
         | the "actually SaaS is worthless" hype. I wish them the worst,
         | considering their business model.
        
           | gekoxyz wrote:
           | In Italy they are really frowned upon by developers. They add
           | 0 value. And it's not like "Oh, VC firms add 0 value to
           | companies they acquire", this is really messed up.
        
         | csomar wrote:
         | So roughly $100m/year profit(edit). They are looking for a 20Bn
         | valuation but interest rates are at 5%? How does any of this
         | make any sense? That or we are in a real bubble.
        
           | postalcoder wrote:
           | You're mixing up the numbers. Their annual run rate is $2.4
           | billion. Revenue grew 140% YoY. That's an 8x sales multiple
           | on good growth. The valuation is not egregious.
        
             | csomar wrote:
             | Sorry I meant profit. On a 5% interest, you get 1bn (pure
             | profit with no risks) per year for a 20bn of capital. Their
             | revenue grew 140% YoY but does that account for new
             | acquisitions? Also, their profit needs to grow x10 in order
             | to match bonds. It may have made sense in a 0% interest
             | rate world but not at 5.
        
               | Zigurd wrote:
               | It's a business model that's like a shark: perpetually
               | swimming and eating or it's dying. That's how they can
               | show big increases in revenue, but the profits are always
               | decaying along with the products.
        
       | moralestapia wrote:
       | It's still a big mystery to me how they were able to pull
       | billion-dollar acquisitions while being one or two orders of
       | magnitude lower in revenue.
       | 
       | >inb4 leverage
       | 
       | Yeah, I know leverage exists but still, you cannot go to a bank
       | and ask them to help you acquire something 100x worth your cap.
        
         | adw wrote:
         | Leverage. They're essentially an 80s style junk bond LBO house.
        
       | foresterre wrote:
       | Their strategy always was "buy company" and "instantly lay off
       | about everyone" to save costs and rapidly increase subscription
       | pricing (1).
       | 
       | So far they've been relatively soft (for their doing) on Komoot,
       | which I too am most anxious off.
       | 
       | Bikepacking.com has a good read about Komoot; it was probably
       | unsustainable in the long run before bending spoons took over
       | anyways (2), yet I much rather had they stayed a sort of indie
       | company driven by their passion. I will cancel my long standing
       | Komoot subscription the day enshittification news breaks.
       | 
       | (1) https://www.dcrainmaker.com/2025/03/komoot-acquired-
       | history-... (2) https://bikepacking.com/plog/when-we-get-
       | komooted/
        
         | threetonesun wrote:
         | You can imagine all of these moderately successful SAAS
         | companies that see peak subscribers starting to fall off on top
         | of legacy tech stacks and no will to make drastic steps to get
         | back to growth and understand why they sell. I've never seen BS
         | as specifically ruining companies (although they've certainly
         | been known to jack up prices for the remaining subscribers) but
         | it's not a good sign when they do buy something you use.
        
           | Zigurd wrote:
           | What would you rather have? A five-year struggle to turn
           | around a stagnant SaaS, or a big fat check? It's a simple and
           | effective model. First one out gets the biggest check.
        
       | k310 wrote:
       | IMO, they buy companies, lay off en masse and sell the now
       | sunsetted products.
       | 
       | Reminiscent of "Chainsaw" Al Dunlap, but he gutted and then
       | flipped whole companies.
       | 
       | I think of them as the bakery outlet store that sells only stale
       | goods.
        
         | alephnerd wrote:
         | It's the circle of life - all businesses reach a point where
         | they don't have significant growth potential or became a "keep
         | the lights on" operation, and at that point their investors and
         | founders wish to exit and cash out in order to invest in
         | greener pastures.
         | 
         | That's where businesses like Bending Spoons, Red Ventures, and
         | IAC come in for digital media.
        
         | w4der wrote:
         | They also have a very intense workplace culture, I had a
         | manager who was part of Evernote while their site was being
         | laid off by Bending Spoons, and he heard some wild stories,
         | they pay above average for a European tech company (but with
         | geo-fenced brackets), crunch a ton and then crash out at a big
         | new year's party were they fly all their teams to some resort,
         | among other things.
        
           | orsorna wrote:
           | Wow sounds very family friendly!
        
             | cucumber3732842 wrote:
             | So?
             | 
             | Doesn't sound any worse than the average restaurant.
        
               | marcosdumay wrote:
               | How many people work in your family? How many different
               | events in random parts of the world can your family
               | attend together at mid-night December 31st?
        
           | ElProlactin wrote:
           | New Year's party with your coworkers at a resort sounds like
           | hell. Or a script for a Jonah Hill movie.
        
         | konfusinomicon wrote:
         | I guess somebody out there has gotta make the croutons
        
         | frevib wrote:
         | This guy dubbed it "get Komooted", as they pulled the same
         | trick for used-to-be-great cycling app Komoot:
         | https://bikepacking.com/plog/when-we-get-komooted/
         | 
         | The app quality almost immediately went down the drain after
         | the acquisition by Bending Spoons.
        
           | doctorpangloss wrote:
           | With LLMs, I feel like they'll have the last laugh.
        
           | insane_dreamer wrote:
           | I don't like PE players like Bending Spoons, but I have used
           | Komoot extensively for years, for cycling (and more recently
           | hiking), and haven't seen any decrease in quality since the
           | acquisition.
        
         | epolanski wrote:
         | Warren Buffett used to do the same for decades, in fact this is
         | how he came to control Berkshire Hathaway which he calls his
         | worst investment, as it wasn't rational and merely driven by
         | ego.
         | 
         | He wanted to take a controlling share of the company and then
         | sell it for pieces so he started to buy increasing stakes in
         | it.
         | 
         | When Berkshire management understood Buffett's plan they
         | decided to stop him to not let him cannibalize and kill the
         | company, and they offered to buy back his shares for 11$ a
         | share which he accepted as it would've been a 2x return on his
         | investment in a very short time span.
         | 
         | But then they made the critical mistake of low balling him by
         | 1$ per share when it came to sign the documents, and he got so
         | much emotional that he went and bought the entire company to
         | prove a point and fire the management.
         | 
         | It was not a good idea and he would not make money on that
         | acquisition, so after selling off the assets he decided to make
         | it the holding for its other investments.
        
           | missedthecue wrote:
           | Buffett wasn't liquidating textile mills. What would happen
           | is that all the publicly traded New England textile companies
           | themselves would close down unprofitable mill locations to
           | stay alive and would use the resulting cash from liquidating
           | the real estate to do a tender offer. Buffett simply bought
           | the shares and waited for the next tender offer to happen.
           | 
           | When Buffett eventually did take control of the Berkshire, he
           | poured tons of money into it to try to keep it alive, and
           | eventually lost every dollar he invested. He didn't make the
           | decision to shut down the last mill until 1985! That was 20
           | years after taking control. Throwing all that good money
           | after bad to try keeping it afloat is why he called it a
           | 'monumentally stupid decision'.
        
         | flaviolivolsi wrote:
         | Yep. They fucked up Komoot so badly that I'm building my own
         | cycling app
        
         | bayindirh wrote:
         | They didn't burn Evernote to the ground to my surprise, but I
         | jumped ship the day they bought it.
         | 
         | It turned out that I have grown out of Evernote anyway, so no
         | big loss.
        
           | criddell wrote:
           | I really liked Evernote but they raised the price too much
           | for me.
           | 
           | I used it mostly as an archive for long term storage where I
           | could find things easily and it was pleasant to use. When it
           | was $36 / year it made sense for me. I probably only used it
           | a dozen or two times every year so it cost me roughly $1 /
           | session.
           | 
           | Then they quadrupled the price for me and paying $4 to dig
           | out my TSA known traveler number was too much. I loaded it
           | all into another application (Obsidian which is going
           | downhill as well).
        
             | kepano wrote:
             | In what way is Obsidian going downhill?
        
       | martin_drapeau wrote:
       | 20VC had an interview with them:
       | https://www.thetwentyminutevc.com/luca-ferrari
       | 
       | I came in thinking they would be like PE and just put products on
       | life support sucking all the recurring they can. But it seems
       | they care and improve the products. I think that has merrit.
        
         | baobabKoodaa wrote:
         | So first they fire all the staff and then they "care and
         | improve the products"? Who? Who does that? They fired the
         | staff, so who improves the product?
        
           | kryptiskt wrote:
           | They fire everybody and then they bring in way cheaper
           | European developers.
        
             | greggoB wrote:
             | Especially Swiss developers, best bang-for-buck on the
             | continent ;)
        
       | mmarian wrote:
       | I'm often thinking about building a better Meetup, it's so
       | expensive for organizers these days. But then I acknowledge the
       | network effects and I give up. And they own Eventbrite too! Savvy
       | people.
        
         | baron816 wrote:
         | Isn't this just Luma?
        
           | mmarian wrote:
           | See reply I just made in other thread.
        
         | burkaman wrote:
         | I see a lot of people using https://luma.com/. I'm sure it's
         | not as big as Meetup but it does have a decent community of
         | users, and you can set up pretty much anything with their free
         | plan.
        
           | alephnerd wrote:
           | At least in the Bay, Luma and Partiful are much bigger than
           | Meetup now.
        
             | mmarian wrote:
             | Interesting. Luma is getting traction in London. Not so
             | much outside.
        
               | alephnerd wrote:
               | It's about the user bases - Luma and Partiful are almost
               | entirely professionals in careers like Tech, Finance, or
               | Entertainment (especially LA), and the events almost
               | always vet before accepting people.
               | 
               | This helps ensure a better noise to signal ratio that
               | Meetup simply couldn't provide.
        
               | mmarian wrote:
               | Interesting point, but I personally didn't find Meetup
               | had a noise issue. You could filter for the right stuff,
               | pretty easily. Also I don't see how Luma/Partiful will
               | avoid this problem eventually.
        
           | mmarian wrote:
           | Luma doesn't do discoverability well unfortunately. Also very
           | tech centric.
        
             | burkaman wrote:
             | I think it depends where you are. SF is all tech stuff but
             | https://luma.com/chicago for example is mostly non-tech.
        
               | mmarian wrote:
               | Oh, didn't know that. My perspective is from the UK.
        
           | baggachipz wrote:
           | I had a good giggle when I opened their homepage and it looks
           | exactly like the Performative-UI library[1] currently in the
           | #1 spot.
        
             | burkaman wrote:
             | True, I think they were early to the trend though, it's
             | looked like that basically since they launched:
             | https://web.archive.org/web/20210821023119/https://lu.ma/
        
           | gulugawa wrote:
           | I've looked at Luma and have mixed thoughts. The UI is a
           | massive improvement over Meetup. However, it seems to be
           | following the standard VC funded business model of attracting
           | users and pushing excessive monetization once users are
           | dependent.
        
         | bsimpson wrote:
         | Partiful feels like it has replaced Facebook Events, Meetup,
         | and the other formerly-popular hubs for in-person event
         | planning.
        
           | mmarian wrote:
           | Hmm, didn't know of Partiful. Quick look at landing page,
           | seems more geared to parties and more social media-y?
           | Meetup's event listing was good as it was; well, before they
           | started charging for you to even see who's attending.
        
             | bsimpson wrote:
             | In NY + SF, it's used for anything you might want to attend
             | that would be organized by an individual - parties,
             | meetups, food crawls, classes, concerts, local events, etc.
        
               | mmarian wrote:
               | Interesting, learned something new, thanks!
        
         | gulugawa wrote:
         | I think we should try to build local hobby-specific websites
         | and then have aggregator sites for event discovery.
         | 
         | I made one for in person board game events in the Washington DC
         | area at https://dmvboardgames.com/
        
       | ChrisArchitect wrote:
       | Some history from only the past year in discussions:
       | 
       |  _Bending Spoons acquires Vimeo for $1.38B_
       | 
       | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45197302
       | 
       |  _AOL to be sold to Bending Spoons for $1.5B_
       | 
       | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45749161
       | 
       |  _Bending Spoons Acquires Eventbrite_
       | 
       | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46124673
       | 
       |  _Tell HN: Bending Spoons laid off almost everybody at Vimeo
       | yesterday_
       | 
       | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46707699
        
       | kome wrote:
       | IPOing just before an evident .com tech bubble is about to
       | explode is courageous. Good luck to everyone.
       | 
       | That said, their business model seems fairly solid, and despite
       | the naysayers, they improve things a bit on most of their
       | acquisitions. So there might be some real value in what they do.
       | Yet, the expected market valuation is way off. But worry not:
       | market will fix that.
        
         | greggoB wrote:
         | > despite the naysayers, they improve things a bit on most of
         | their acquisitions
         | 
         | There seem to be quite a few commenters stating the exact
         | opposite, with concrete examples in hand (especially for
         | Komoot). Do you have experience with any of the services
         | they've bought, and can say how they've been improved?
        
           | fhdkweig wrote:
           | Not the OP, but from a stock market perspective, improvement
           | can mean "lay off workers, and raise subscription prices".
           | Not good for the users, but good for the kinds of people who
           | like reading news about IPOs.
        
             | greggoB wrote:
             | Fair enough, though I do bristle at the use of the term
             | "real value", like somehow it's a general net positive.
             | They should at least qualify with "for shareholders" so we
             | can know that their interests are specifically directed at
             | financial enrichment
        
         | riffraff wrote:
         | why is it courageous?
         | 
         | It seems the perfect time to do it while the market is still
         | bubbly.
        
       | Zigurd wrote:
       | I'm old enough to have been acquired by Computer Associates at a
       | company that acquired my company. CA's business model was to buy
       | companies and then fold their products into an omnibus license,
       | all of their customers, including the ones they just acquired,
       | becoming involuntary licensees whatever the cat dragged in this
       | quarter.
       | 
       | It turns out a lot of corporate IT has no idea how to switch
       | vendors in case a product they use gets acquired by a company
       | with this business model.
        
         | Maxious wrote:
         | The number of corporate IT departments got caught when VMWare
         | licencing shifted from Dell EMC to Broadcom
         | https://www.techradar.com/pro/broadcom-has-allegedly-hiked-v...
        
           | Zigurd wrote:
           | For context, Broadcom bought CA.
        
           | kryogen1c wrote:
           | This still confuses me. It's clear they wanted to 10x
           | licensing costs and /10 customers which assumably raises
           | margins, but i still dont see it working out.
           | 
           | My international enterprise and all our business partners
           | moved every broadcom product we have to a competitor. On top
           | of that, they were very aggressive and combative with their
           | sales+cease and desist threats.
           | 
           | They earned enemies for life. Some of us care about business
           | relationships. Broadcom is dead to me and anyone that will
           | listen to me.
        
             | nikanj wrote:
             | That's what people have been saying about Oracle for
             | decades, and they're still going strong
        
             | justsomehnguy wrote:
             | > They earned enemies for life. Some of us care about
             | business relationships. Broadcom is dead to me and anyone
             | that will listen to me.
             | 
             | That's the thing: Broadcom don't. Care, bother, whatever.
             | You are not even a blip.
        
         | burnte wrote:
         | > It turns out a lot of corporate IT has no idea how to switch
         | vendors in case a product they use gets acquired by a company
         | with this business model.
         | 
         | This always shocks me. I moved a company off of Salesforce in
         | 45 days without a big issue. Day 1 was a bit slower but by day
         | 2 folks were back at full speed. I've pulled off EMR
         | migrations, ERP, accounting, etc. Moving is scary but doable.
         | 
         | Sometimes the execs will just pay rather than risk anything. At
         | my last job I spent 7 months researching and building a
         | migration plan for an app that was literally costing us
         | customers/patients because it was so bad. Came back with a plan
         | to move to a better system (of of 38 I researched), 6 month
         | implementation, $800k/yr savings directly, another $400k
         | indirectly from other tools we could cancel because the new
         | tool would do all of that. The board ignored me and the rest of
         | the C-suite, and went back to the vendor and signed a new
         | agreement that INCREASED the yearly bill from $1.2m to
         | $1.8m/yr. They completely cut me out of all the negotiations, I
         | didn't even know it was happening, and I was the CIO. I quit,
         | and they're now being sold at a firesale price.
        
           | fakedang wrote:
           | Curious what did you move them into from SF? SF is usually
           | treated as this infallible perfect piece of software by non-
           | tech folks, especially those looking to pad their resumes.
        
             | temp_praneshp wrote:
             | Do _you_ know what three easy replacements are? If no, how
             | do you know those people are looking to pad their resumes,
             | did you figure that out from your non-SF conversations?
        
             | burnte wrote:
             | SF has worked very hard to cultivate that reputation, and
             | at the end of the day they're mostly an overpriced
             | application host. Once you communicate to the stakeholders
             | that what they have in SF is just another application, and
             | not actually "special", the conversations become a lot
             | easier to have. They feel like Salesforce has them over a
             | barrel at renewal time and helping them understand they CAN
             | move makes a lot of conversations happen.
             | 
             | The answer to what have I switched people to is at the end
             | of this post.
             | 
             | One company was using SF as a patient management system
             | because their EMR wasn't set up right. They spent 6 figures
             | a year on SF just to communicate with patients, make and
             | change appointments, send and receive documents, record
             | insurance information, etc. I spend 2 months fixing the EMR
             | and they moved everyone to that, canceled, SF, and saved
             | $200k/yr on SF and another $250k/yr on SF consultants. For
             | a $50m/yr business, that's a lot.
             | 
             | Another was using SF as a ticket system. Those folks we
             | moved to FreshService. $180k down to $15k/yr. From my
             | experience, ticket systems tend to be one of the most
             | common existing applications that get duplicated inside SF.
             | People think they have to build it in SF rather than just
             | linking your apps. There was another company who kept SF
             | for their CRM aspects but we moved them to an external
             | ticket system that linked to SF and cut their SF bill from
             | $550/yr to $270/yr.
             | 
             | Then there have been cases where I'm brought in while in
             | the middle of a development project. One of my favorites
             | was this consulting firm said they could do all these
             | things and integrate their EMR and Salesforce and that they
             | had done it before with their custom middleware. But every
             | month there'd be a new change-order from them where they
             | said certain things weren't possible, and it came with an
             | invoice! They were CHARGING this company to reduce the
             | scope of an approved, signed, paid contract. I jumped in
             | and said, "we're not paying any of these change orders, you
             | don't get to charge us to do less work. You promised all
             | these features, you said your software ALREADY DID them.
             | What's the problem?" Then for two months we went round and
             | round where I was able to offer them methods to do every
             | single feature they said wasn't possible, and then they'd
             | invent another reason they couldn't do it. I said we're
             | done, canceling the contract, not paying any open invoices,
             | not paying the remainder of the invoice, and in exchange I
             | wouldn't recommend we sue them to get back everything we
             | paid so far. Their own lawyer agreed, and we parted ways.
             | They had us sign a Salesforce contract before we even paid
             | them, so we were a year into a 3 years salesforce contract
             | and literally nothing had been built out. By this time it
             | turns out I had a reputation in the salesforce finance
             | department, so it didn't take a lot of arguing to get them
             | to offer a 50% reduction in exchange for paying off the
             | contract immediately and canceling it.
             | 
             | What they get moved to depends on what they actually need.
             | 50% of the time it's not a CRM at all but a more
             | appropriate app like an EMR, ticket system, ERP, scheduling
             | apps, invocing solutions for existing accounting apps, etc.
             | 
             | The rest of the time it'll be to CRMs and marketing tools
             | that already exist, or custom extensions/connectors to
             | their apps or a way to link their apps and a CRM. I've
             | moved folks to Monday, Nutshell, Hubspot (who I don't like
             | either but they're better than SF), a dozen others.
             | 
             | I haven't dealt with a company yet that couldn't move to a
             | cheaper alternative with no loss in functionality. If execs
             | have emotional ties to SF then I can't do anything. I had
             | one client, the sales VP shot down a conversion because he
             | liked being able to say "we run on Salesforce!" Literally.
             | he liked being able to brag they could afford Salesforce. I
             | just left that one alone.
        
               | fakedang wrote:
               | > I had one client, the sales VP shot down a conversion
               | because he liked being able to say "we run on
               | Salesforce!" Literally. he liked being able to brag they
               | could afford Salesforce. I just left that one alone.
               | 
               | Unfortunately this is what I meant by the braggarts and
               | resume padders. It's usually only after these people
               | leave that the company takes a serious look at their
               | books and then decide that they want to move away from
               | SF.
               | 
               | Salesforce is the most bloated piece of any software I've
               | ever seen, and I've seen Azure. Apples and oranges, yes,
               | but Azure is far more navigable than Salesforce.
               | 
               | Once when planning to buy some property, I watched for 10
               | minutes as the real estate sales agent painstakingly took
               | about 10 minutes to navigate through and book an
               | apartment for me. Enough time for me to start second-
               | guessing about buying the property. Had SF been faster, I
               | would've been stuck with some really illiquid shit.
        
             | zeruch wrote:
             | I worked at SugarCRM for years. It's often easier than one
             | suspects once you figured out what a customer pain points
             | are and show them a less burdensome solve. Most businesses
             | do not need the kitchen sink approach of SFDC or SAP, they
             | just have rarely had that demo'd to them.
        
           | gedy wrote:
           | Sometimes these deals are backroom friends/frat bros/sex etc
           | and make no sense without knowing that crap.
        
             | burnte wrote:
             | Oh yes, I've had proposals rejected for terrible reasons.
             | "I like bragging we can afford Salesforce." "We're special,
             | other companies can't do what we do and other platforms
             | can't do what Salesforce does." "I go back years with
             | Salesbozo, he's giving us deals no one else gets, I trust
             | him." (meanwhile they're paying 10% under list, not a good
             | deal at all).
             | 
             | One of my absolute favorites was, "well, our Salesforce
             | consultant is the husband of the VP of marketing so we
             | can't do anything that would eliminate his contract." In
             | the end we got rid of Salesforce, him, AND the VP of
             | marketing.
        
               | gedy wrote:
               | Yeah I hate the double standards here, if someone lower
               | level recommends someone that they know or heaven forbid
               | related to HR acts like they must quash this awful
               | nepotism and scheming ha.
        
               | ethbr1 wrote:
               | HR works for leadership. Everything is consistent from
               | that starting point.
        
           | Seattle3503 wrote:
           | Why was the board involved in that decision to begin with?
        
             | burnte wrote:
             | That is both an excellent question and the root problem at
             | that company. The PE firm was a majority shareholder, drive
             | the board, and there were two board members who were
             | HEAVILY involved in the company. Too heavily, they kept
             | making decisions about them and not the company, and that's
             | why I left. Several months later the PE firm was tired if
             | waiting for results, fired those two board members and sold
             | their share of the company at a big loss.
             | 
             | I was really surprised, because one of the two I'd worked
             | with at three other companies, all of which had successful
             | exits (including an inpatient healthcare provider that we
             | ran and sold during COVID!). Something changed, and at this
             | company he made it all about him making the calls and not
             | just trusting his CEO and company staff. He froze out the
             | C-suite, manipulated facts to cause a change of leadership,
             | and in 6 months he forced the new CEO to do all these dumb
             | ideas we'd already tried repeatedly, taking the company
             | from being break even and close to profit to a $2m/month
             | revenue shortfall. There were structural process issues
             | inside the company but he just kept insisting we needed a
             | bigger marketing spend, "marketing can fix any problem."
        
               | LearnYouALisp wrote:
               | > The PE firm
               | 
               | ah, can stop there
        
           | greazy wrote:
           | What is your ERM of choices? Opinion on EPIC?
        
       | defmetrix wrote:
       | Another IPO that I will be avoiding.
        
       | easyThrowaway wrote:
       | Mark my words: they will keep growing until they collapse, and
       | once that happens, they will use their reach and contacts with
       | the Italian government to ask to be bailed out out of debt. It's
       | not a matter of "if", but "when".
       | 
       | It's a well known strategy that has been applied by several
       | Italian companies, FIAT (now Stellantis) first and foremost.
        
       | gulugawa wrote:
       | I looked at the Bending Spoons employee handbook, and they openly
       | admit that employee performance is evaluated on "making an
       | impact". To me, this means adding pointless features for the sake
       | of getting better ratings.
       | 
       | Since Bending Spoons purchased Meetup, I have noticed the UI
       | becoming more cluttered and hard to use. Also, I consistently get
       | ads asking me to buy an organizer subscription to host events,
       | even when on the page for a group I'm an organizer for.
       | 
       | After seeing this emphasis on "impact" cause Meetup's UI to
       | degrade, I'm skeptical about the company's long term future.
        
         | toast0 wrote:
         | > I looked at the Bending Spoons employee handbook, and they
         | openly admit that employee performance is evaluated on "making
         | an impact". To me, this means adding pointless features for the
         | sake of getting better ratings.
         | 
         | I worked at a company that was all about impact. Take the site
         | down, that's a lot of impact ... If they wanted something else,
         | they should have been more specific.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2026-06-09 05:02 UTC)